So the amount of money they give to Democrats is a measure of how much Islamosexualiberalsim they teach in their classrooms? Is it one-for-one? Does a sawbuck equal one “I Heart Osama” in the middle of Intro Physics? How is this measured? More important, why is thinking about wingnut stats turning my brain into tapioca?

You realize, right this very moment, thousands of intelligent, educated people are preparing to spend another year trying to prevent more people from turning out like Curt, or David Horowitz?
It’s like an epidemic of hate crimes against ignorance.

as an academic who donates to (and votes for) Democrats I’d like to say to Curt, yes it IS because we’re smarter than you. Sorry but it really is that simple.

I wonder what a graph of Ace of Spades’ smartrons versus Curt’s would look like?

My favorite criticism is that universities are liberally biased because they frown upon religious zealots from walking around bashing gays and minorities.

I don’t know; I went to a faggy hippy North East law school, and while there were plenty of faggy hippy liberals fagging up the place with all “reading,” and “discussion,” and “analysis” based on things like “history” and “trends” and “experience,” there were more than a couple conservatives teaching and attending the place. A lot of them tended to gravitate toward corporation law, securities law, finance, etc. Let me tell you, these folks were as conservative (and predictable) as the WSJ Opinion page. They weren’t dummies, however, and they did as well as anyone in their classes.

Guess what they DIDN’T spend most of their time doing – whining about liberal bias while they were getting a solid education and a future with a nice earning potential. You see, non-stupid people understand that there are lots of ideas out there that might conflict with their own; they can still hold these beliefs and be considered credible, as long as, you know, everything that comes out of their mouths isn’t based on paranoid revenge fantasies, and blind ideology.

Teach! Without bias.

By jiggledy!

they can still hold these beliefs and be considered credible, as long as, you know, everything that comes out of their mouths isn’t based on paranoid revenge fantasies, and blind ideology.

Welp, there goes the credibility of…umm…let’s see…every single right-wing blog and think tank, at least. Most of the Republican Congresscritters and the Executive branch, too.

“Yup, it’s all because they are so much smarter than the rest of us.”

Brilliant. Trust a conservative blogger to argue that professional academics with advanced degrees aren’t smarter than the general population. Not that the article said they are anyway. Educated people more politically aware and active than others shock!

Umm, I have a question [raises hand]. (It is class, after all, right?)

When these VERY large organizations contribute money to political campaigns, to what extent is that the professors and instructors, and to what extent is that the administrators? I mean, I deal quite extensively with Stanford, and I don’t think I’ve EVER talked to an actual professor. Maybe at SLAC, but not at the rest of the institution.

These are, in addition to being educational institutions, HUGE businesses with very large investments and diverse interests. It just seems to me if a professor made a political contribution, it would not list as coming from his/her employer. But if that entity itself made a political contribution, just as Cheveron or Google might, that would show up as listed in the chart.

So it doesn’t really make sense to attribute the contributions of the organizations to the politics of the professors.

And it does make sense that educational institutions would expect more funding and better support from a Democratic government as opposed to a Republican government…

mikey

Overheard at Flopping Aces University:

Professor Biolosmith: Imonna vote fer them whut wants creationism!
Professor Lawson: Amonna vote fer them that knows that the king is the law!
Professor Multiculpepper: I ainta votin fer no queers niggers ur wimmen!

Umm, I have a question

Stop hogging the smartrons.

So conservatives spend years trashing education, promoting anti-intellectualism, and pushing sheer dumbassery like “creationism is, like, totally science!” and now Flaccid Aces wonders why the academic world doesn’t heap bales of money upon conservative candidates.

Wow.

Now is it any wonder the youth in this country are so totally lacking in common sense?

Yes, because if there’s one thing youth is known for, through the ages and across all boundaries of culture and custom, it’s that young people have lots of common sense.

Of course, knowing Curt, “common sense” = “Republican values”. But even then, the above snark remains valid.

Of course, knowing Curt, “common sense” = “Republican values”.

Oh, don’t worry about that, Mark Noonan is way ahead of you on that one:

“The reason I’m a conservative is because, to paraphrase Margaret Thatcher, the facts of life are conservative. Conservatism is, boiled down, basic, common-sense human belief.
…
Common sense is conservatism by another name – so, if we want a common sense candidate, just pick the most conservative one out there (hint, in 2000 and 2004, it was President Bush…so, for the past 6 and a half years, you’ve gotten nothing but the most common-sensical government you could get…and if you don’t like it, then you should check carefully into what you think is common sense).”

If you disagree with the above, then it just shows how lacking you are in common sense, moonbat.

Srsly. What do they care? Don’t wingers simply fancy themselves as “men of action” who just put their boots up the asses of teh Islamohippies without sitting around thinking about stuff that like, you know, um …

Are they surprised that academics tend to support OTHER educated individuals when making decisions? Wingers have openly hated science, objective logic, and people who with glasses who sit around and read books, people with funny hair, people who generally GO TO CLASS TO LEARN. Look at their fucking president for Christ’s sake.

And they are shocked and dismayed that the people they despise don’t support their knuckle-draggery.

Mikey:

The donations from the “educational industry” are mostly from individuals, not the institution itself: http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/contrib.asp?Ind=W04&cycle=2006 I’m not sure that educational institutions *can* donate as institutions. So if I donated to Hillary or Ron Paul or whoever, it’d be counted as part of my university’s total. I don’t know why this is so, but it is.

Still, the contributions could come from any employee of the institution, not just the professors. Granted, the profs are probably the most willing and able to donate, but any number of non-teaching staff can and do donate as well.

I don’t think these political views necessarily show up in the classroom, though. I’ve taught neuroscience and psychology for several years now, and I don’t think I’ve ever had cause to mention who I voted for or how I feel about various issues. I suppose I do talk about evolution (which appears to be a political issue, much to my despair), but it’s virtually impossible to discuss anything biological WITHOUT mentioning evolution.

I sometimes think that the right’s skepticism about evolution has a lot to do with the “leftward” leaning of many professors, at least those who are in the sciences. These professors have decided to devote their lives to science–it’s their career, their calling, and their hobby. Then along comes a President who gives a sly rhetorical wink to people who don’t believe in one of the strongest and most fundamental theories that science has ever developed. There are two possibilities: Either the President doesn’t understand evolution, or he’s willing to pretend he doesn’t in order to rustle up the votes of the ignorant. Either way, it’s difficult to pull the lever for a person who shows his utter contempt for the very issue that’s central to your life.

Yikes, thats a lot of typos.

Nonprofit organizations, which most colleges and universities are, cannot form PACs, so the money CRP [Center for Responsive Politics] associates with them is solely from employees and their families.

From the fine print bellow that first table.

Teach! Without bias!

Of course, Curt has never explained how a University employee donating money to a political party impairs that same employee’s ability to teach without bias. If the guy who served me my slice of pizza today donated money to the Rep’s, does that mean he can’t give me pepperoni! Without bias!

(Incidentally, one of the best professors I had in college was a right-wing kook. Of course, politcs didn’t come up too often in Finite Element Analysis, but still…)

Incidentally, one of the best professors I had in college was a right-wing kook.

I had one of those who did an excellent job with Shakespeare. Thanks to him. Politics did indeed come up in off-hand remarks in front of class, but somehow we weren’t graded for our responses to those.

So I had to blow him.

96′ GOP platform: That is why we will abolish the Department of Education, end federal meddling in our schools, and promote family choice at all levels of learning.

94′ Republican Congress: The freshman Members of the House majority will introduce legislation to abolish the Department of Education on May 24. The Budget Committee endorses their goal of returning education to the States and local level. This proposal would eliminate funding for approximately 150 programs in the Department of Education.

CATO Institute: Congress should abolish the Department of Education and return education to the state, local, or family level, as provided by the Constitution.

Ronald Reagan: The budget plan I submit to you on Feb. 8 will realize major savings by dismantling the Department of Education.

Phyllis Schlafly: Abolishing the Department of Education was one of Ronald Reagan’s campaign promises when he ran for President in 1980. Fulfilling that promise is long overdue, and the time to do it is now.

Of course, the reason that educators don’t donate to Republicans is that they are filthy hippies.

Long ago teachers would not wear their politics on their sleeves

Never mind the lazy assumption that giving to a candidate is tantamount to teaching along a party line. Any chance Curt has any evidence that “long-ago teachers” were giving less money to Democrats, or more to Republicans?

(BTW, I’m shocked at how high W&M is on the list.)

Any chance Curt has any evidence that “long-ago teachers” were giving less money to Democrats, or more to Republicans?

Maybe he could phone his local teachers’ union and they could help him find some contacts.

The question would be, How much money is the government giving to these institutions in the form of subsidies, grants etc…

The republican line is usually clambering to reduce the amount of money the government gives out to educational institutes.

Why would Universities donate to a political party that was trying to reduce or cut their funding?

Congrats Gavin. It’s funny and not an LOLcon. But I repeat myself.

We should cut funds to any college that has liberal bias, which is most. We should publicaly fund colleges like Regent and Liberty U to balance out the bias. Its not fair that they have to pay their own way while gay union dem freaks get a free ride on my money. I want affirmitve action for conservatives because its time.

The Spellings-run Department of Education has been one endless “fuck you” to the academic community, from the ridiculous ghost-written “Spellings Commission” report on how Harvard should be more like DeVry to the incredibly blundering (and failed) attempt to federalize higher ed accreditation through negotiated rulemaking (even though Congress hadn’t passed any new law). And let’s not forget that the President has openly tried to eliminate the Perkins Loan, TRIO Upward Bound, TRIO Talent Search, GEAR UP, the Supplemental Education Opportunity Grant and LEAP.

Maybe next Curt will be upset that so few hens have contributed to the Fox for Henhouse Watcher ’08 campaign.

Long ago teachers would not wear their politics on their sleeves
This is true. In my day they wore leather elbow patches. Apart from Professor Barstow, who often turned up to class in body paint. That was Advanced Linear Algebra so people made allowances.

Unless this was so long ago that 76% was roughly 88%, via inflation, it looks like Curt has flunked the reading-comprehension portion of today’s quiz.
He gets his 88% by adding up the proportional contributions from his “top-10 education donors” chart, since the 76% from the entire education sector is less impressive. But I guess you knew that.

We should cut funds to any college that has liberal bias

Those would be the ones with biology departments.

See, Gary, the problem is, what impartial board of thoughtful education professionals would we allow to determine which colleges have a “liberal bias”?

I’m completely flummoxed. Gary, would you be willing to make these determinations?

Thanks, youngster…

mikey

I would guess that when Rod Paige, Bush’s Secretary of Education, called the NEA a terrorist organization it cost the Republicans some support among academics.

Now is it any wonder the youth in this country are so totally lacking in common sense?

Aren’t “youth” people who are between 13 and 18? or maybe as old as 20, at the most?

So if “youth” are totally lacking in common sense, why would college professors and post- K-12 academics have anything to do with it? They haven’t even got their grubby, ink-stained, liberally-biased hands on the youths yet.

We should cut funds to any college that has liberal bias, which is most. We should publicaly fund colleges like Regent and Liberty U to balance out the bias. Its not fair that they have to pay their own way while gay union dem freaks get a free ride on my money.

Gary, I’ll try this really slowly so you can follow along.

See, private colleges are privately funded. And public colleges – like state colleges and universities – are publicly funded. And if you look at the graph at the top, Gare? Tell me how many of those universities are public universities.

Give up, Gare?

OK – there’s two. University of California and University of Pennsylvania. And even those two are one step removed from the State, economically, by having Boards of Regents and the like who oversee them.

So, Gare, all the other universities on that list are funded EXACTLY THE SAME as Regent and Liberty – through private funds, tuition revenue, grants, and donations.

And the percentage of the University of California system’s budget that comes from the State is approximately 20%. I imagine Penn is similar. So, Gare, even the public universities are, for the most part, NOT PUBLICLY FUNDED.

Or, to be perfectly accurate, not funded by mandated entitlements from the state budget.

Thank you. I laughed outloud

Maybe repugs are just cheapskates?

“)es, because if there’s one thing youth is known for, through the ages and across all boundaries of culture and custom, it’s that young people have lots of common sense.”

That’s what always cracks me up about the wingnut proclamation that “the troops” support the war in Iraq — yes, let us indeed consult nineteen year old high school graduates on all affairs of state!

[P]rofessors understand the importance of participating in the political process, are well-versed on issues and—perhaps more so than the general population [—can recognize a threat to their interests, Herrnson of the University of Maryland said. “Faculty will get involved when they feel like something big is at stake.”]
We’ll assume that by “threat to their interests,” & “something big is at stake” Floppy Curt means: “Oh noes, they’ll cut off our funding, blah blah yada yada,” but another interpretation might be that these academic industrialists are just a little worried about, oh, the Constitution, their rights (as citizens, not as indoctrinators of liberal group-think) the rising national debt, the deaths of thousands of service people & hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, etc., etc.

Seventy-six percent of the education industry’s total federal contributions for ‘08 has gone to Democrats, on par with the industry’s partisanship in the last two election cycles.

Can we see some other industry figures? Like, I dunno, maybe the oil industry?

Don’t despair, Curt. You can always count on home schools where SAH moms in gingham aprons show their kids how $2+$2 can = $5 for the Republican Partay!.

g:there’s two [public universities]. University of California and University of Pennsylvania

Actually, g, you singled out the wrong two. UPenn is a privately funded university. But William & Mary is a publicly funded college.

I wasn’t sure about Penn, but they said something about being funded by the Commonwealth on their website – mostly for the vet and ag programs.

The UC I definately know about.

Are you sure you’re not checking on Penn State? UPenn has a vet school — where they treated Barbaro — but the last serious ag training I knew about happening in West Philly was in the 18th century.

“Bias” means supporting anything left wing, even if it’s on your own free time and doesn’t effect your teaching.

Really stunning that science professors donate to the party that doesn’t get its scientific theories from Leviticus, or that foreign language professors donate to the party that doesn’t throw tantrums over “freedom fries” and other jingoistic nonsense, or that history professors donate to the party that doesn’t believe the Founding Fathers were evangelical theocrats, or that law professors donate to the party that doesn’t shit on the Constitution and trash habeus corpus, or that government professors donate to the party that seems to disagree with the monarchal ambitions of the current administration, or that international relations professors donate to the party that doesn’t deem the Geneva Conventions “quaint” and doesn’t espouse pre-emptive unilateral wars.

Really, really stunning. What a bunch of liberal loons those academics must be.

Next: An expose on how those dirty, evil illegal immigrants from the brown countries are ruining our nation by preferring the party that doesn’t race-bait them.

Curt has never explained how a University employee donating money to a political party impairs that same employee’s ability to teach without bias.

Well, it’s obvious. The 75+% of college professors who donate to Democrats clearly inject their lefty biases into everything they teach. Meanwhile, the 25-% who donate to the Republicans provide only pure, unbiased education to the thirsty minds of our nation’s youth. If only the law would step in and silence those damned liberal professors, the good and right-thinking ones would be free to propagandize, er, edumacate properly.

Well Curt is not smart enough to know the difference between “well-versed on issues” and “smart” so I fail to see why I am supposed to take any of his commentary on this subject seriously.